Jeevan Mendis is considered a batsman who bowls in Sri Lanka - or at best a "batting allrounder" - which I've always found interesting because after watching a fair bit of him (batting and bowling) I'm quite convinced he'd be coached and selected as a specialist bowler in Australia. He'd give our Test squad a shake even if he batted like Chris Martin, but he just sends down a few in comparison to the rest of the spin stocks in Sri Lanka, even domestically.

I'm not having a go at Mendis, I thought he was bowling very well for the most part. I was bemoaning the ignorance of New Zealand batsmen when faced with wrist spin. The complete inability of any of our batsmen to pick the wrong'un, even when it was being used 2 or 3 times an over is symptomatic of the lack of quality spin bowling on the domestic circuit.

Originally Posted by HeathDavisSpeed

I can think of a list of Sydney Grade posters who would contribute a better average post than Bahnz.

Jeevan Mendis is considered a batsman who bowls in Sri Lanka - or at best a "batting allrounder" - which I've always found interesting because after watching a fair bit of him (batting and bowling) I'm quite convinced he'd be coached and selected as a specialist bowler in Australia. He'd give our Test squad a shake even if he batted like Chris Martin, but he just sends down a few in comparison to the rest of the spin stocks in Sri Lanka, even domestically.

Says as much about domestic cricket in Sri Lanka, as it does about Jeevan Mendis.

Due to lack of depth in batting his main role is as a top order batsmen and with the crazy depth in spin bowling, he is seen as part time spinners.

Though the thing that makes Mendis look like a good spin bowler, is that he gives it a rip. Whereas spinners in Australia and NZ aren't encouraged to give it rip due to poor spin bowling conditions in those countries.

The man, the mountain, the Mathews. The greatest all rounder since Keith Miller. (Y)

I'm not having a go at Mendis, I thought he was bowling very well for the most part.

Haha yeah I know, I wasn't trying to argue with you; it's just something I've been meaning to make a post on for a while and seeing you mention Mendis and part-time spinners in the same post made me think it was a good opportunity.

Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
'Stats' is not a synonym for 'Career Test Averages'

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Tucker

People go into politics to change the world. That's a bad idea. The only good reason to go into politics is to sweep government away so that the world can change itself.

Originally Posted by GIMH

Freddie is the greatest cricketer ever so the fact these comparisons are being made means three things:

Not a great deal about these ODIs, no. I doubt even Sri Lanka are getting much out of winning them. But I find it very funny that a few weeks ago cricket writers on both Stuff and NZHerald were whingingrelentlessly about Guptill and Bracewell being rested for this pointless ODI series.

Much better off having Guptill at home with his feet up and Bracewell bowling in the Plunket Shield.

I agree with the sentiment though. Absolute nothing matches, made even less memorable as a result of the rain. And the crowds look abysmal. Surely three Tests, three ODIs and a T20 was the way to go. Tests always mean something. ODIs are a dinosaur and T20 shouldn't really be played at international level.

Ian Snook. Perhaps he can join Deaker for an hour, would be ideal for a drinking game based on reactionary and ******** rugby analogies.

Don't squander the gold of your days making a shrine of cricket videos, trying to improve the hopeless failure, giving your life away to the Blockys, the Devciches and the Weerasundaras! Surrender your devout little cricketing heart to the inured agribusinessman.

I agree with the sentiment though. Absolute nothing matches, made even less memorable as a result of the rain. And the crowds look abysmal. Surely three Tests, three ODIs and a T20 was the way to go. Tests always mean something. ODIs are a dinosaur and T20 shouldn't really be played at international level.

I agree with the sentiment too. The 3/3/3 series would obviously have been best and I wonder where the articles in the media complaining about that were, or for that matter the same schedule for the recent Windies series. My opinion on ODIs has changed in last couple years and even 5-ODI series these days seem long and drawn out to me (let alone badly rain affected ones). I won't pretend this has nothing to do with just how poor we are at ODIs - despite being pretty poor at tests and T20s this ODI side really is the pits. My only positive thoughts regarding ODIs is that the next World Cup is in NZ+Aus.

Meanwhile NZC continues to say that tests are highly important and the most pure form of the game while scheduling 2-test series after 2-test series.

Do NZC actually schedule them though - or is their hand forced by overseas boards that would rather play with the big boys? And when scheduling ODIs (weather permitting) know that they'll get a day's play, as opposed to the fourth and fifth day of a Test?

I can see no place for five match ODIs anywhere in the world. Three max. Even World Cups are becoming increasingly uninteresting.

The fools of the world say Test cricket is in danger but it's actually fast becoming the only format that has meaning. And the only potential spanner in the works is that god awful idea for night cricket to appease the fat cat TV executives.

In saying that, one of the most enjoyable days of my Test cricket viewing life was at Eden Park in 2002 (?) against England under lights. Usman Afzaal completely losing one from McMillan into the stands, Ashley Giles claiming he didn't see one he caught in the outfield (hell of a guess) and just general ridiculous outstandingness. But I wouldn't want it regularly

Do NZC actually schedule them though - or is their hand forced by overseas boards that would rather play with the big boys? And when scheduling ODIs (weather permitting) know that they'll get a day's play, as opposed to the fourth and fifth day of a Test?

Have no doubt that the other boards are a big part of it, however there would be some sort of negotiating process and if NZC pushed hard for 3 tests we'd surely be playing at least a few more proper series. They would make less money because ODIs still bring in revenue apparently, while tests I believe are typically a cost. So I suspect NZC just don't care enough about tests to push for longer series. Surely could play an extra T20 or two to make up the financial difference.

Unlucky Boult - has really had these Lankan batsmen in trouble here. Tough chance for Watling.